General Star Trek thread

breezy1985 · 25-02-2021 08:27AM

The characters do look like maybe they were made for another show originally but it's sad to see a show made for Nikelodeon which isn't even out yet and is for kids is getting the #notrealtrek bashing from the fanboys already.

I loved Star Wars but thought the Clone Wars and all that was crap so I just didn't watch em and moved on. Will probably do the same with this

JayRoc · 25-02-2021 09:23AM

I think some concern is understandable tbh. Every time something comes out under the Star Trek banner that is sub-par generic action/sci-fi it is obviously going to "dilute" the brand.

If that went on for long, it would mean there was more bad Star Trek out there than good...and who wants that fate for a franchise they love?

Markitron · 25-02-2021 09:29AM

It is perfectly possible to make a sci-fi/fantasy show that appeals to kids and adults equally.

Clone Wars is a great example. This seems to be going the other way.

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 09:43AM

breezy1985 wrote: »

The characters do look like maybe they were made for another show originally but it's sad to see a show made for Nikelodeon which isn't even out yet and is for kids is getting the #notrealtrek bashing from the fanboys already.

I loved Star Wars but thought the Clone Wars and all that was crap so I just didn't watch em and moved on. Will probably do the same with this

Takes some surfeit of possessiveness, and an utter absence of self-awareness to rail against a kid's cartoon FFS. To be fair, this is a poison among a lot of fanboys of pop culture these days and not exclusive the Trek: wherein they can't seem to process the idea that not everything is going to explicitly speak to them. Be it the overall age-group, sexuality of main characters or whatever. It's pathetic.

As to the designs? Yeah they're not especially "Trek" in appearance, but I just don't have any interest in kids cartoons in general anyway. I know Clone Wars and the like try to angle the material at all ages, but it just comes down to personal taste. That and I just hatttttte TV CGI cartoons; the animation is always so rubbery and blergh. Again, personal taste, more power to people who enjoy Clone Wars et al.

Honestly, I think in principal it's amazing that Trek will expand into kids cartoons: it's literally going to prepare the ground for ... wait for it ... The Next Generation of Trek fans

Not that the angry internet neckbeards will appreciate that - and I'm sure there are already 100s of YouTube videos of idiots like that ranting into their webcam.

breezy1985 · 25-02-2021 10:12AM

JayRoc wrote: »

I think some concern is understandable tbh. Every time something comes out under the Star Trek banner that is sub-par generic action/sci-fi it is obviously going to "dilute" the brand.

If that went on for long, it would mean there was more bad Star Trek out there than good...and who wants that fate for a franchise they love?

Ya but people don't even know it's bad yet.
It might be great for kids or it might be the next Ewoks: Caravan of Love but we don't know yet but the clowns who should be way too old to care about a Nikelodeon cartoon are already queuing up to feel outraged

Evade · 25-02-2021 10:13AM

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect something with Star Trek slapped on the side of it to at least be recognisable as Star Trek. A Star Trek kids cartoon is nothing new, that's what TAS was, and it was mostly bad. Kids deserve good TV too.

They wouldn't even have to make something just for kids if they didn't make STD and Picard "adult" in the most juvenile ways. Kids used to watch Star Trek, I've been watching it as since I was about four.

Rawr · 25-02-2021 10:13AM

Poster doesn't give away too much. Kind of surprised that they didn't go for any of the more recognizable alpha quadrant races, but that in itself might be a positive since they'll avoid messing too much with established cannon there.

One thing I am pleased about is the general lack of humans. Trek has been very human-centric over the years despite the wide range of aliens in the Trek Universe. I get that budget limitations made it that they couldn't do exotic aliens all of the time, and that most aliens were just humans with a dab of makeup.

Lower Decks brought in a more alien Starfleet, which I kind of liked. So, this very non-human group of kids might be a good sign. If Kurtzman stayed away from this one too, maybe it will be good?

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 10:24AM

Ah lads, we're not going to enter the whole "I've been watching Trek since I was a zygote, and I TURNED OUT FINE" argument?

Nickelodeon aims for a wide range of ages, so looking at the designs, I'd speculate they're angling for something suitable for the younger scale of things. Kids like cartoons, and if this acts as a gateway drug to the overall universe, isn't that a Good Thing in the end?

If I see a thread appear on this forum, dedicated to this series and it turns into a deep-dive on the .. I dunno, nacelles of the ships, I may just unsub from the forum altogether

AMKC · 25-02-2021 10:27AM

Honestly that poster looks like it would be more suited to a fantastic Fours cartoon or even Star Wars certainly not Star Trek. But as long as its respectful to Star Trek and if it gets more kids into it then great.
I am glad that my first show do was TNG and not that.

Evade · 25-02-2021 10:37AM

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah lads, we're not going to enter the whole "I've been watching Trek since I was a zygote, and I TURNED OUT FINE" argument?

No it's a "Star Trek used to be suitable for all ages" argument. There were elements that were scary for young kids, watching Where Silence Has Lease at seven years old in a dark room at night comes to mind, but it was still fine.

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 10:44AM

Evade wrote: »

No it's a "Star Trek used to be suitable for all ages" argument. There were elements that were scary for young kids, watching Where Silence Has Lease at seven years old in a dark room at night comes to mind, but it was still fine.

'tis a half-joke Evade

I just think it's quite clear from the aesthetics that Prodigy is leaning towards the younger scale of the market and most kids aren't raised on ostensibly "adult" TV. That it's OK if this show doesn't stick rigidly to some expectation of what Trek is or isn't in this case. It can be over there, doing it's thing, entertaining kids as a gateway drug.

Markitron · 25-02-2021 10:44AM

Evade wrote: »

No it's a "Star Trek used to be suitable for all ages" argument. There were elements that were scary for young kids, watching Where Silence Has Lease at seven years old in a dark room at night comes to mind, but it was still fine.

The episode where Barclay turned into a spider ****ed me up for life.

breezy1985 · 25-02-2021 10:55AM

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah lads, we're not going to enter the whole "I've been watching Trek since I was a zygote, and I TURNED OUT FINE" argument? Nickelodeon aims for a wide range of ages, so looking at the designs, I'd speculate they're angling for something suitable for the younger scale of things. Kids like cartoons, and if this acts as a gateway drug to the overall universe, isn't that a Good Thing in the end?

If I see a thread appear on this forum, dedicated to this series and it turns into a deep-dive on the .. I dunno, nacelles of the ships, I may just unsub from the forum altogether

I bet most people who enjoy James Bond are blissfully unaware of James Bond Jr. and it hasn't "diluted" the movies. Same goes for Indiana Jones, Star Gate and Highlander.

And ya if people start crying that X is not canon or ruins the timeline about a kids show it will be that that might ruin Trek for me not the quality of a kids show

Goodshape · 25-02-2021 11:08AM

pixelburp wrote: »

Takes some surfeit of possessiveness, and an utter absence of self-awareness to rail against a kid's cartoon FFS.

[...]

but I just don't have any interest in kids cartoons in general anyway

It's all well and good not caring about something you've already decided to entirely dismiss out of hand

Not that I think I'm "railing against" anything, but I do have an interest in kids watching Star Trek. I think the "sheer ****ing hubris" of treating Trek like some edgy adults-only affair is as misguided as anything else in modern Trek.

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 11:20AM

Goodshape wrote: »

It's all well and good not caring about something you've already decided to entirely dismiss out of hand

Not that I think I'm "railing against" anything, but I do have an interest in kids watching Star Trek. I think the "sheer ****ing hubris" of treating Trek like some edgy adults-only affair is as misguided as anything else in modern Trek.

I only dismiss it because, based purely on one poster's aesthetic leanings and intimations elsewhere, I know younger-skewed kids cartoons aren't my thing. I just don't presume to judge or dictate to anyone who does enjoy them, or those that make the cartoon

More Trek, ultimately, is great!

Honestly, TV cartoons have just slipped my interest in general as a genre: Lower Decks (for the Trek), Disenchantment (for Matt Groening & Futurama alumni) & Bob's Burgers (because Louise is fantastic) are about the only cartoons I've watched in the last year or so and I couldn't give you a deep or meaningful reason why I stay away from them overall. It's like Musicals: I get they're popular, and beloved, but just not for me. And hey, that's OK; I ain't going to rant on YouTube about them either

Stark · 25-02-2021 11:21AM

breezy1985 wrote: »

I bet most people who enjoy James Bond are blissfully unaware of James Bond Jr. and it hasn't "diluted" the movies. Same goes for Indiana Jones, Star Gate and Highlander.

And ya if people start crying that X is not canon or ruins the timeline about a kids show it will be that that might ruin Trek for me not the quality of a kids show

Young Indiana Jones was pretty great if I remember correctly.

JayRoc · 25-02-2021 11:22AM

AMKC wrote: »

Honestly that poster looks like it would be more suited to a fantastic Fours cartoon or even Star Wars certainly not Star Trek. But as long as its respectful to Star Trek and if it gets more kids into it then great.
I am glad that my first show do was TNG and not that.

I honestly don't get why the producers of a new kids show would want the Star Trek name attached to it, really, or what difference it would make.

What small children would base their choices on the "Star Trek" brand being on something?

Maybe more likely for a parent familar with the franchise to let their kid watch it?

breezy1985 · 25-02-2021 11:25AM

JayRoc wrote: »

I honestly don't get why the producers of a new kids show would want the Star Trek name attached to it, really, or what difference it would make.

What small children would base their choices on the "Star Trek" brand being on something?

Maybe more likely for a parent familar with the franchise to let their kid watch it?

Probably an easier sell with network execs or something

25-02-2021 11:26AM

Goodshape wrote: »

Hey, firstly - I can appreciate a well made "for kids" TV show.

Secondly, I was about 10 to 12 when I first discovered and fell in love with Star Trek, and TNG and TOS seemed perfectly good enough for kids then. I'm entitled to be a little disappointed that Trek4Kidz might now be reduced to silly zany wacky antics with 6 of the most obvious looking personality-tropes-as-character-design characters you're ever likely to see.

And also... this looks 0% Star Trek so far. I can write it off on that account if not the others.

(would be nice if I'm wrong though! ...still hope.)

I was 6 or 7 when Sky started showing TOS in the run up to TNG.
Had MASK, Transformers, Thundercats, etc

Most of today's animation is lazy and generic but I'll hold off until my kids give me a review

breezy1985 · 25-02-2021 11:26AM

Stark wrote: »

Young Indiana Jones was pretty great if I remember correctly.

If I remember correctly you are not remembering correctly

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 11:27AM

breezy1985 wrote: »

If I remember correctly you are not remembering correctly

Young Indiana Jones, IIRC, was a weird one in that it tried to be one of those "Educational" shows where Indy kept bumping into Important Events / People all the time, getting in the way of an actual plot or storyline. I wanna say it got better when the older Indy came along and joined the Belgian forces during WW1? Wasn't there an extended period of the show set in the trenches?

odyssey06 · 25-02-2021 11:31AM

pixelburp wrote: »

Young Indiana Jones, IIRC, was a weird one in that it tried to be one of those "Educational" shows where Indy kept bumping into Important Events / People all the time, getting in the way of an actual plot or storyline. I wanna say it got better when the older Indy came along and joined the Belgian forces during WW1? Wasn't there an extended period of the show set in the trenches?

The plots with the child age young Indi were very 'educational' as you note.
I think it picked up once Sean Patrick Flannery came on board as young Indy.
Yes he made it to the trenches in Belgium and fought in East Africa also. They would be the strongest episodes in the series.

Came via Dublin (caught up in Easter Rising) and London (caught up with Elizabeth Hurley).
Then post WW1 it got a bit random and weird... Jazz episodes? Maybe one in Transylvania.

Stark · 25-02-2021 11:40AM

I started watching it with Sean Patrick Flannery

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 12:07PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

The plots with the child age young Indi were very 'educational' as you note.
I think it picked up once Sean Patrick Flannery came on board as young Indy.
Yes he made it to the trenches in Belgium and fought in East Africa also. They would be the strongest episodes in the series.

Came via Dublin (caught up in Easter Rising) and London (caught up with Elizabeth Hurley).
Then post WW1 it got a bit random and weird... Jazz episodes? Maybe one in Transylvania.

YouTube'ed a couple of moment and even by today's standards, those were pretty high production values for a TV show. I'd say only something like Game Of Thrones would have that many locations, costumes, and props. A reboot of the idea wouldn't be the worst recycling of a LucasArts property right now; even if the idea is possibly a bit played out (given Indy figured in nearly every major historical event of the 20th century lol)

Goodshape · 25-02-2021 12:11PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

Came via Dublin (caught up in Easter Rising)

oh, wow! Didn't know that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkajKDx4RB4

Only half-watched that clip so far but looks like they did an alright job of it tbh! Better than Captain Planet's Norn Iron adventures anyway

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 12:11PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I was 6 or 7 when Sky started showing TOS in the run up to TNG.
Had MASK, Transformers, Thundercats, etc

Most of today's animation is lazy and generic but I'll hold off until my kids give me a review

Oh I dunno, lazy compared with what though? Hanna Barbara where all their characters had neckties because it was easier to animate by swapping head positions (instead of drawing the neck moving around)? Or where intros would run for minutes on end to save on actual story time? I loved Dogtanian but never realised how lonnnnng that intro went on for.

Whilst I hate TV CGI, I gotta say that TV animation is in much better shape than it used to be; I'm not mad on the aesthetics of Lower Decks, but the range, detail and complexity of the animation was frequently impressive. I don't think I ever spotted a reused prop, animation or whatnot ala those old HB cartoons.

pixelburp · 25-02-2021 02:57PM

BTW, something that's a bit lost among the chatter about Star Trek: Prodigy, is that as I suspected, the Section 31 show is floating around in purgatory.

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/star-trek-universe-paramount-plus-prodigy-1234914526/

Specifically, the below aside is the good/bad news, depending on your thoughts on the show. "Conversations" feels like heavy code for "Not remotely near greenlit". Me? I'm delighted to hear this because of all the problems with nu-Trek, it doesn't need more Space Hitler muddying up the universe's image.

Kurtzman and McNamara say there are still “conversations” about a new “Star Trek” series around Michelle Yeoh’s Philippa Georgiou and the mysterious Section 31, and there are other “Trek” shows in development that haven’t been previously announced. But they emphasized that the current five-series slate will likely not expand further until at least one of the shows runs its course.

breezy1985 · 25-02-2021 03:38PM

pixelburp wrote: »

BTW, something that's a bit lost among the chatter about Star Trek: Prodigy, is that as I suspected, the Section 31 show is floating around in purgatory.

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/star-trek-universe-paramount-plus-prodigy-1234914526/

Specifically, the below aside is the good/bad news, depending on your thoughts on the show. "Conversations" feels like heavy code for "Not remotely near greenlit". Me? I'm delighted to hear this because of all the problems with nu-Trek, it doesn't need more Space Hitler muddying up the universe's image.

Ide love if it never happened. I hate her character, the MU and any non DS9 S31. The idea of constantly dragging up this secret organisation will make them not so secret and ruin the concept like Voyager did with the Borg

ilovesmybrick · 25-02-2021 04:30PM

breezy1985 wrote: »

Ide love if it never happened. I hate her character, the MU and any non DS9 S31. The idea of constantly dragging up this secret organisation will make them not so secret and ruin the concept like Voyager did with the Borg

What makes that news quite irritating is the two episodes they wasted in Discovery season 3 to set up this series. I don't think an extra two episodes would have helped with the many, many issues I had with season 3, but they could have used them to further develop the plot/characters/ships etc.

odyssey06 · 26-02-2021 09:17AM

Seen on Twitter... Was Cheers a Holodeck program?
https://twitter.com/CalebHowe/status/1252032537125322753/photo/1

EWAc53QWAAYbUMw?format=jpg&name=medium

General Star Trek thread

Comments